Carter v. State
Decision Date | 27 June 1944 |
Docket Number | 8 Div. 361. |
Citation | 19 So.2d 361,31 Ala.App. 526 |
Parties | CARTER v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Denied Aug. 22, 1944.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County; W.J. Haralson judge.
Proctor & Snodgrass, of Scottsboro, for appellant.
Wm N. McQueen, Acting Atty. Gen., and John O. Harris, Asst Atty. Gen., for the State.
Appellant was tried in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Alabama upon an indictment charging murder in the second degree. He was convicted of manslaughter in the second degree. From the judgment of conviction and sentence rendered, he appeals to this court.
We agree with the Attorney General, in his brief filed in this cause, that "the statement of facts as set forth in appellant's brief is substantially correct in every material respect." The statement follows.
With commendable candor, appellant's counsel urges that the prime question involved in this appeal is the refusal of the trial court to grant appellant's motion for a new trial on the ground that the jury was not authorized to find the appellant guilty of manslaughter in the second degree under the evidence in this case. We are therefore requested to so hold as a matter of law. This we cannot do, and we will attempt to state why.
"When the indictment charges an offense of which there are different degrees, the jury may find the defendant not guilty of the degree charged, and guilty of any degree inferior thereto, or of an attempt to commit the offense charged; and the defendant may also be found guilty of any offense which is necessarily included in that with which he is charged, whether it be a felony, or a misdemeanor." Code 1940, Tit. 15, § 323. Dennis v. State, 112 Ala. 64, 20 So. 925; Compton v. State, 110 Ala. 24, 20 So. 119; Kelly v. State, 235 Ala. 5, 176 So. 807; Keel v. State, 29 Ala.App. 191, 194 So. 416.
"(Emphasis ours.) 40 C.J.S., Homicide, § 55, pp. 918, 919. See also Sawyer v. State, 20 Ala.App. 504, 103 So. 309; Jones v. State, 21 Ala.App. 234, 109 So. 189.
The evidence in the case under consideration is silent as to the size, weight or material of the "automobile crank" alleged to have been used with which to strike the deceased. It was not introduced in evidence and, so far as the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Helton v. State
...nature that determines whether it is likely to produce death as bearing on the question of the degree of the homicide. Carter v. State, 31 Ala.App. 526, 19 So.2d 361, cert. denied, 246 Ala. 101, 19 So.2d 364 (1944) (a "car crank"). Thus a deadly weapon is not only a weapon with which death ......
-
Williams v. State
... ... be towards establishing any material fact involved, the court ... cannot exclude it from the jury. Its weight is for their ... determination.' Morris v. State, Ala.Sup., 39 ... So. 608, 611. See also, Burns v. State, 229 Ala. 68, ... 155 So. 561; Carter v. State, 31 Ala.App. 526, 19 ... So.2d 361 ... The ... authorities are committed to the doctrine 'that it is ... much the safer rule to charge upon all the degrees of ... homicide included in the indictment, when a party is on trial ... for murder, unless it is perfectly clear to ... ...
-
Harris v. State
...stare decisis compels us to consider them as correct in form. Judge Carr quoted the Duncan charge illustratively in Carter v. State, 31 Ala.App. 526, 19 So.2d 361. The formula, 'a charge of assault with intent to murder includes a charge of assault and battery,' was approved in Stovall v. S......
-
Chavers v. State
...stare decisis compels us to consider them as correct in form. Judge Carr quoted the Duncan charge illustratively in Carter v. State, 31 Ala.App. 526, 19 So.2d 361. The formula, 'a charge of assault with intent to murder includes a charge of assault and battery,' was approved in Stovall v. S......